Motives or Intentions?

I have been fortunate enough to be an educator since 1992 and sometimes catch myself off guard when I think about how much I've learned and how much I still need reminders on. After all of these years, I know that the major source of frustration in this work can come down to communication. And despite all of my best efforts, I still miss a step (I should have known) here and there.

I am also acutely aware of misperception.  I think we have images of roles and those can become outdated. I sometimes wish it didn't exist when it comes to leadership and even try to work in full defiance of it but the older I get, the less patience I seem to have for it. What do I mean by this? My answer won't be popular but I'd ask kind readers of this blog to bear with me as I work this out in print.

What do I mean by this?

I mean, that no matter our best efforts as leaders on all levels, there still exists a tendency to jump to the wrong conclusions about leaders and efforts. Some will see decisions as motives and others will see them as intentions. Think about the connotations for each.

In my current role, I hear phrases like "DO (District Office) said" or "They" have asked..." I don't know why we jump to those words. There were at least two recent "directives" that someone said were from me this week that never even existed in my mind. District leadership roles were being used as the bad guy or the "reason" a decision was made in a particular area.

I've been considering what is the human tendency to do that? When a member of an organization is upset or a change or decision is needed to move a group forward,  why immediately blame someone above you on the organizational chart? Why even blame? Why not, instead, ask? Ask more questions. Questions always improve communication.

I was discussing this with a kind teacher leader in our district and he told me that's the way it always is but only for some. That was reassuring. We also talked about how changes in leadership rehatch those older "misperceptions" about leadership.  That's an interesting point too if you think about it. Does change cause us to revert back to what we think we know in the absence of what we do not know yet ?

The real work is in dismantling that and despite every smile, kind word, affirmation, or celebration, all of that takes real time. It can't just happen because we will it too. When I first arrived to my current district, I was talking with a building leader and was sharing how hard making some connections and earning trust felt. I'll never forget the words he told me.

"You'll have to walk through fire (with us) to earn that."

Turns out he's right. That's how trust may need to be built. One step at a time and with clearly communicated intentions.

Yet, perhaps, we could build those relationships even faster if we assumed trust at the onset in the absence of any real evidence to feel otherwise.

Imagine the work that could be realized if we took that approach. Heart to heart, intention by intention.

----


*My thanks to Debbie Kirkpatrick for pushing my thinking on the need to or need not to build trust. She writes,  "I think trust should be assumed, it is mistrust that is earned. I have heard it said that, "love stinks". In fact it is being unloved that stinks. The head can barge along like a bully at times while the heart receives a lethal blow or trickles to a slow death. Homeostasis where the head, heart and spirit are the place peace is found. Validation and knowing every single part of the sum is the only way to strengthen and secure the encapsulation of success and love."